Merged: The Draft Thread For Stuff About The Draft Including Thoughts About The Draft

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
BonesJones said:
I think its funny that this dude has been talking shit to other people lately, and is now coming up with lazy ass bullshit reasons why Luke Kennard's floor is a prime J.J. Redick.

And then when I call him out on this BS, he suggests I haven't watched Kennard play even though I watched at least 10x more college basketball than him in the past season.
Click to expand...

If you actually watched him play, and landed on JJ Redick as your comparison....lol alright, you know all.

And I dont like people that act like they are above others, so I will continue to call them out on it. All your posts at me are aggressive, and why? Because I have different opinions? I make a simple statement that I like Kennard and you kick down the door and start coming at me, but then play victim when I snap back? Get outta here.
 
The price of moving up?

"Phoenix will send 13, 28, the draft rights to Bogdan Bogdanovic and 2020 second round pick to Sacramento for the #8 pick (Marquiss Chriss)" - 2016 Draft

With Knick fans clamoring for the #15 pick for just capspace is a little annoying. If only they knew the ego Neil has.

"Portland is looking to trade up" -Adam Zagoria

IMO this is what I expect on draft day - consolidating picks to move up. Hopefully this Knick stuff dies down.
 
BonesJones said:
Cherry-picking stats is when you pick a stat that on the surface, makes your argument look stronger, but ignore the context that plays a factor in that stat and would make your argument look weaker.

For example, you cherry-pick the TS% stat and say "Kennard's and Redick's TS% were even". However, you ignore the context of: Redick scored 8 more ppg on more shots and had less talent around him to take the pressure off of him and to set him up for shots. That context makes Redick's TS% much more impressive than Kennards.

What context am I ignoring when it comes to the usage stat? You said that the offense ran through Kennard the most, but the usage stat said two of his teammates used more possessions than Kennard did, thus the offense ran more through them than Kennard. What context am I missing? I'm not saying who was the best player on the team, I'm simply proving your vague, bullshit statement wrong with a statistic.
Click to expand...

And I could retort that Redick was a senior while Kennard was a sophomore. And using the surrounding talent to minimize the impact a player had? That's a two way street. Kennard took pressure off those guys just as much, if not more since he was dukes most dangerous, and consistent scorer.

And I'm not arguing who had a better season, Redick or Kennard. I'm arguing who's the better shooter.
 
Scalma said:
If you actually watched him play, and landed on JJ Redick as your comparison....lol alright, you know all.

And I dont like people that act like they are above others, so I will continue to call them out on it. All your posts at me are aggressive, and why? Because I have different opinions? I make a simple statement that I like Kennard and you kick down the door and start coming at me, but then play victim when I snap back? Get outta here.
Click to expand...
Because I've seen you act condescending to others lately, and your sitting here assuming that I haven't watched Duke play in the past year because I have a different opinion of you, which is basically saying you don't think you. You said my viewpoint and comparison of J.J. Redick to Kennard was "lazy", and that my subconscious stereo-typing led me to that thought, and that you were laughing at my comments. Then you go and make lazy comparisons yourself that are extremely easy to prove wrong with one stat that doesn't need context, while you use stats that involve context and ignore them. The way you're acting in this debate is rather annoying.

As far as coming at you about the Kennard comment, it was just an extension of the previous argument about Carmelo and his great spot-up shooting. You also like Crabbe more than any other poster on this board, so I noticed you have an affinity for spot-up shooters that struggle defensively.
 
Fez Von Savage said:
The price of moving up?

"Phoenix will send 13, 28, the draft rights to Bogdan Bogdanovic and 2020 second round pick to Sacramento for the #8 pick (Marquiss Chriss)" - 2016 Draft

With Knick fans clamoring for the #15 pick for just capspace is a little annoying. If only they knew the ego Neil has.

"Portland is looking to trade up" -Adam Zagoria

IMO this is what I expect on draft day - consolidating picks to move up. Hopefully this Knick stuff dies down.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I can't believe these Knick fans really think #15 in a great draft would be possible for taking on salary. All these Knick fans expecting #15 to take on Turner wouldn't even trade #26 to get rid of Noah. They'd expect a team to take him for a 2nd rounder.
 
My hope for draft pick positioning is that we trade all 3 of our picks for a mid-lottery selection, then trade our 2018 1st to a team with multiple picks in the late 1st-early 2nd such as Orlando (25, 33, 35) or Utah (24, 30), or we give a good team at the back end of the draft the right to swap 2018 1sts with us for a late 1st (for example: Utah gets right to swap 1sts with POR in 2018, POR gets 30th pick). Swapping 2018 1sts to get another pick in the 2017 draft would still allow us to trade our 2019 1st.

If we did trade our 2018 pick, I'd want it to be lottery (or at least top 12) protected, in both a straight up trade or a swapping situation.
 
BonesJones said:
Yeah, I can't believe these Knick fans really think #15 in a great draft would be possible for taking on salary. All these Knick fans expecting #15 to take on Turner wouldn't even trade #26 to get rid of Noah. They'd expect a team to take him for a 2nd rounder.
Click to expand...

As I said in the Harkless thread Knick fans on Realgm think they're going to get the 15th for taking just Harkless, it's hilarious. We probably sound the same when we think we can get PG for our picks and garbage, though.
 
santeesioux said:
As I said in the Harkless thread Knick fans on Realgm think they're going to get the 15th for taking just Harkless, it's hilarious. We probably sound the same when we think we can get PG for our picks and garbage, though.
Click to expand...
We're not trying to dump bad contracts with picks.
We're not trying to dump Harkless' contract.
We're not trying to trade #15 unless it moves up.

Trading #15 with Harkless as a cap dump is so ridiculous... Us getting Paul George is 100 times more plausible, as we probably have a 5% chance of landing him, and the Knicks have a .05% chance of convincing Olshey to dump Harkless with the 15th pick.
 
BonesJones said:
Because I've seen you act condescending to others lately, and your sitting here assuming that I haven't watched Duke play in the past year because I have a different opinion of you, which is basically saying you don't think you. You said my viewpoint and comparison of J.J. Redick to Kennard was "lazy", and that my subconscious stereo-typing led me to that thought, and that you were laughing at my comments. Then you go and make lazy comparisons yourself that are extremely easy to prove wrong with one stat that doesn't need context, while you use stats that involve context and ignore them. The way you're acting in this debate is rather annoying.

As far as coming at you about the Kennard comment, it was just an extension of the previous argument about Carmelo and his great spot-up shooting. You also like Crabbe more than any other poster on this board, so I noticed you have an affinity for spot-up shooters that struggle defensively.
Click to expand...

Yes, as I said, I snapped back, but that was a reaction to your snarky little comment. I don't say anything to anyone unless they come at me.

I still think the comparison is lazy, not because your opinion is different than mine, but because they're different type of players. Would you still compare the two if Kennard wasn't white and from duke? Answer that honestly. But we can just end this convo, because it's not going to go anywhere.
 
Scalma said:
Yes, as I said, I snapped back, but that was a reaction to your snarky little comment. I don't say anything to anyone unless they come at me.

I still think the comparison is lazy, not because your opinion is different than mine, but because they're different type of players. Would you still compare the two if Kennard wasn't white and from duke? Answer that honestly. But we can just end this convo, because it's not going to go anywhere.
Click to expand...
But that's your opinion. I brought up a ton different comparisons other than white and Duke.

-Short-armed
-Undersized
-Unathletic
-SGs
-Bad defenders
-Struggle to create for themselves and others
-Good shooters from mid-range and 3
-Particularly effective coming off pin-downs
 
BonesJones said:
I'm not sure we can.
Click to expand...
As someone who, being in Melbourne Australia, can't get to watch and scout college basketball, I enjoy the opinions of those that do.

The beauty of an opinion, is that they're like an asshole, everyone has one. With draft prospects, like many other things, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

You're all entitled to have your own opinion, no matter what it is, but who bloody knows who's right and who's wrong at this stage? No one does!
 
Outside Blazers, what moves do people expect teams to make?

Just my thoughts:

No. 1: Boston Celtics select Markelle Fultz. Really a no brainer, best player available plus his only major competitor has made it awfully clear that he doesn't want to play there.

No . 2: LA Lakers select Lonzo Ball, with the outside chance of De'Aaron Fox. Russell moving to SG has to happen as Lakers will almost 100% draft a point guard. LaVar has been trying to sell Ball there for a while but I feel that Fox might turn out to be much better in the workouts. Basically, if Fox can show that he can shoot, he will be a better prospect insantly. I still feel it's going to be Ball.

No. 3: Philadelphia 76ers, this is a tough one. Most mock ups have them selecting Josh Jackson here but I don't see him as a great fit. If Ball falls there, they will take him but if he doesn't, IMO it makes more sense for them to go for a pure scorer like Tatum or a point guard of the future like Fox than Jackson. Still feel they will take Jackson.

No. 4: Phoenix Suns take Jayson Tatum (or Josh Jackson). If Jackson falls there, they will take him. If he doesn't, they should take Tatum. They need a small forward and they don't really need a point guard when they have Bledsoe.

No. 5; Sacramento Kings take De'Aaron Fox. This IMO is almost nailed on, as long as Lakers do not take Fox at 2. If Fox falls here, he'll be selected 100%, Kings need him and he's excellent fit next to Hield. If Fox doesn't fall here, I am expecting Kings to take Tatum (because Fox going higher IMO means that Tatum is available at 5) and then hope that Ntilikina or Smith Jr are available at 10 - very small chance of that happening, so I guess they'll try hard to move up.

No. 6: Orlando Magic select Dennis Smith Jr. I don't think they are that sweet on Payton, and Smith has potential to be properly great. Alternatives are Malik Monk and Jonathan Isaac but I reckon Smith will be considered BPA here.

No 7: Minnesota Timberwolves, I think they will try to trade down from here as they still need to give time to Dunn at point guard (so no Smith/Ntilikina), and don't really need another slasher (Isaac). I think Monk would be good fit there but they also need to give LaVine minutes. Won't be surprised if #7 gets traded to Sacramento for #10 and getting rid of Pekovic contract. Then Sacramento could select Isaac here.

From no. 8 it's basically the best player available for 3-4 next picks. IMO good fits are Markkanen at Kings (if they get Fox at 5), Collins at Denver, Mitchell at Hornets.
 
santeesioux said:
As I said in the Harkless thread Knick fans on Realgm think they're going to get the 15th for taking just Harkless, it's hilarious. We probably sound the same when we think we can get PG for our picks and garbage, though.
Click to expand...

A lot of mention has been made about moving the #15 pick but Portland can't do that....at least not until after the Draft. Because they traded away last year's pick, they can't trade this years pick until after it is no longer a Draft pick and becomes a player. (Ted Stepian rule if I understand correctly.)

So in any consolidation of picks trade, either #15 can not be included or Portland would be picking a player for another team to be traded either after the Draft or after July 1st, I'm not sure which. Someone please clarify if needed.
 
TBpup said:
A lot of mention has been made about moving the #15 pick but Portland can't do that....at least not until after the Draft. Because they traded away last year's pick, they can't trade this years pick until after it is no longer a Draft pick and becomes a player. (Ted Stepian rule if I understand correctly.)

So in any consolidation of picks trade, either #15 can not be included or Portland would be picking a player for another team to be traded either after the Draft or after July 1st, I'm not sure which. Someone please clarify if needed.
Click to expand...
You don't understand correctly. The Stepien rule only applies to the holding of future picks. It doesn't matter how many prior years' picks had been traded, as long as a team has at least one first round pick in every consecutive pair of future drafts, they are within the Stepien guidelines. Blazers could trade all three picks this year for a player if they want as long as they have a pick in 2018. Further, even if they were to do so, once the draft is over they would have the latitude to trade that 2018 pick as long as they have a pick in 2019--and that pick doesn't even have to be their own pick, just needs to be somewhere in the first round.

All the Stepien rule requires is that a team cannot make a trade that leaves them without a first-round pick in two consecutive future drafts--nothing more restrictive than that.
 
Okay, so it's the discussion of trading this year's #15 and next years 2018 1st round pick that is problematic?
 
TBpup said:
Okay, so it's the discussion of trading this year's #15 and next years 2018 1st round pick that is problematic?
Click to expand...
Nope, that would be ok as well to do. You just need to have a pick, doesn't have to be your own. By possessing 20 and 26, 15 and our 2018 are movable together.
 
lawai'a said:
listed at 15#'s heavier than cj's combine weight and acknowledged as an aggressive and very good defender out of the gate. guarded 1's, 2's and occasionally 3's for pitino. all acc defense, averaged 2.6 steals per 40, and the 40.5 inch vertical. shot the hell out of the 3 at the combine work outs. I think he is ready to contribute now more so than many of the other freshmen bigs available then. much better athletic measurable than Jackson if he is there at 15. I think of him in terms of a stronger Patrick Beverley currently and avery Bradley potentially.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying I don't like the guy, just wonder how that will work with Dame and CJ. First concern is what happens when we play a team with a guard who can post up? Mitchell isn't that kind of guard to be able to defend that.

Also, do we really need another short, non-point guard? You would assume a three guard rotation with Dame and CJ as starters. When Dame sits, then who runs the offense? Turner? It sure won't be CJ or Mitchell. That is why Napier was a good fit.
 
BonesJones said:
Won't happen, but what do you mean worried? Worried as in you hope they do?
Click to expand...

Worried as in they may be the BPA and also the worst fit at the position we need the least help. I guess you have to take them and hope you can pull a trade.
 
Does anybody know who we're having in for workouts tomorrow? The first workout is the 7th right?
 
Usually by June I am more excited about the potential draft picks than I am in March. But after reading the draft threads every day for the last couple of months..... the less excited I get. Right or wrong we have pretty much picked apart every prospect. I am ready to trade......
 
Pinwheel1 said:
Usually by June I am more excited about the potential draft picks than I am in March. But after reading the draft threads every day for the last couple of months..... the less excited I get. Right or wrong we have pretty much picked apart every prospect. I am ready to trade......
Click to expand...
wish I could super like this post. after t0p 5 or so too many flaws for absolutes about future stardom.
 
The 76ers are reportedly listening to offers for the 3rd pick as they are assuming Fultz and Ball are off the board by the time their turn rolls around.

And no, I didn't post this to say that means we can or will go after their pick. Just interesting since they are normally looking to add more high picks. They might truly be ready to cash in for an established star (if they can get one to come or keep).
 
KeepOnRollin said:
The 76ers are reportedly listening to offers for the 3rd pick as they are assuming Fultz and Ball are off the board by the time their turn rolls around.

And no, I didn't post this to say that means we can or will go after their pick. Just interesting since they are normally looking to add more high picks. They might truly be ready to cash in for an established star (if they can get one to come or keep).
Click to expand...

That is great to hear! Meyers, Crabbe and #26 for #3, Dario Saric and Richaun Holmes. I'll take your comments off the air. :bgrin:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Fez Hammersticks
NBA Draft Thread Vol. 2 (Merged)
17 18 19
Replies
566
Views
37K
illmatic99
illmatic99
Stevenson
  • Poll Poll
Did we draft the wrong Collins?
Replies
29
Views
2K
tykendo
tykendo
Rastapopoulos
Acquirable draft picks?
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
riverman
riverman
mook
The Draft Game
Replies
6
Views
807
Wizard Mentor
Wizard Mentor
Boise Blazer
Olshey: Blazers will find a way into the draft
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
PDXFonz
PDXFonz

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top